*Aqua*

ESA had a look at what they developed, said 'It's good!' and then pumped millions in it. The UK Space Agency did the same. I don't think they can be fooled easily.

Fascinating! Who of you developed a working space plane? Who of you managed a project of this size? Who of you had a budget of several hundred millions? None? I guessed so. It is really always fascinating how fast people become 'experts' in stuff they never touched. At least my numbers come from . So if you know better than him, why don't build your own space planes or rocket?

I think there are. But which of them can test a hybrid engine? In rocket engine tests you don't need hypersonic air. In jet engine tests you don't need a vacuum. They need a special facility which can provide both to simulate going to space and back again.

Why do we need a reputation/karma system? I remember forums where groups of people give points to each other daily which leads to absurd numbers making the system useless. So... why do we have it? If it's just used as a 'thank you' you can write that as a post.

They think the complete Skylon project (includes development and I guess a working prototype plus different payload container) will cost 12 billion US$. Looking at the numbers I'm sure they already included an upper stage. The estimated cost for bringing a kg of payload into orbit is 1100 US$. A Falcon 9 is at 4100 US$ per kg. Btw they successfuly tested a smaller scale precooler. At the moment they a building a facility for testing a SABRE engine in jet and rocket mode.

Racist bits and bytes are preparing to take over the world and then gets beaten by a vaporized guy.

Try a 250 ohms headphone. If you can get it loud enough without using an amplifier, tell me.

At least 60 are needed to archive approximately the same development speed of Squad. So you have 61 opinions now how things have to be done. Yeah, development will be easy and smooth.

It depends. If you used a 15 bucks headphone until now you'll definitly hear an improvement and if your ears are still in good enough shape you may hear the noise. If there's noise then you'll have to switch to an external soundcard to get rid of it. I heard the FiiO Olympus E10 is a good one but it's a bit pricey. You mean those overpriced cables?And it's true, common onboard chips aren't bad... if there's no noise. The Sony headphone only costs about 15€ or 20$. In my experience cheap headphones sound cheap and break after one or two years of use. 'Sounds great'? Did you try some real hi-fi equipment? After that you won't be able to bear laptop sound anymore.

We are talking about Star Wars here.

Do you have any add ons installed in the IE? Something like an ad blocker? If yes then deactivate or uninstall them and try again.

Don't worry, a kickstart isn't needed. In jet mode it will start like a normal turbofan.

Nope. It will take of in jet engine mode. It will sound like any regular jet plane. At a height of 28 km however...

Man trains girl how to kill. Girl trains man how to read and write.

300 $ on that one? Are you sure? With that money you can get a hi-fi stereo headphone which will stomp the A50 into the ground. Wifi headphones are nice but also heavy and need to be recharged. A good old one with a cable is much more comfortable. An what will you do of some device interferes with the wireless connection? And who needs a virtual 7.1 headphone? You only have two ears right next to two speakers inside the headphone. So it's only stereo sound. Don't let the marketing trick you! IMO there are only about three good headphone manufactures: AKG, beyerdynamic and Sennheiser. These will also provide replacement parts for at least 30 years. (Yes, their headphones can easily be used that long!) Good headphones with prices between 100 - 300 $ are: Sennheiser HD600 (neutral sound) (wow, the price went up by 100$!) or HD650 (allrounder, neutral sound, some people say it sounds boring) AKG K601 (neutral sound) or K701 (allrounder, neutral sound) beyerdynamic DT990 Pro (slightly more bass, excellent for movies and games) or DT880 (allrounder, less bass) I use a beyerdynamic DT990 Pro 80 ohms with a Asus Xonar DG (because of the amplifier). Total costs were about 150€ (~200$) when I bought them.

Squad needed a team of 10 to 15 guys and 3 years to make KSP to what it is now. Let's just say the developers work 1760 hours a year (8 hour/day * 5 days/week * 4 weeks/month * 11 months/year). That's a total of 52800 to 79200 man-hours or ~6 to ~9 man-years (24 hours work every day for years!). And you want to do the same in your free time with the help of a few interested fans and being inexperienced? Nope. That'll never work out. You'll have grey hair before you can release anything playable.

You're asking for the Roche limit. It's the distance at which the tidal forces rips a satellite apart. But you'll need either the radius of the planet or the black hole to calculate it. Let's try another way: The Schwarzschild-radius of the black hole. The formula is r = 2 * G * M / c² G - gravitational constant c - speed of light M = 1,989 * 1038 kg (100 million sun masses) r = 1,989 * 1038 kg * 1.485 * 10-27 m/kg r = 295366500000 m = 1,97 AU That means the planet must be at least 2 AU apart from the black hole because at that distance is the event horizon. Of course the distance must be greater than that by a lot.

There was a mod which changed the physics bubble IIRC. But do you really want every craft in, say, 500 km diameter to be calculated? That's a lot of space. If you've got a sat network it will lag out your computer.

Star Wars is a fairy tale, not a science fiction story! It's just the setting which looks like scifi. The force is just another word for magic.

@RainDreamer Why do some many people believe it's easy to hack a computer? Military system are hardened against such attacks. Even with a direct access to the hardware you won't be able to reprogram it because everything is encrypted. And no, you can't hack an encryption in mere seconds like they do in movies. You can also expect the drones to be EMP-proof. Nobody will point weapons at an enemy which are useless. There is a counter-measure for everything you mention.

So you just don't know how to break? Oh come on! Everything well below orbital velocity is usually easy to handle. If it's not then you built your rocket wrong or did the wrong thing at the wrong time. It truly sounds like a cheat. There are only two things in KSP which can be considered a bit difficult: Acceleration/deceleration and rocket building. And now you want to take half of it away. KSP won't be fun anymore.

Not really, except you can manufacture everykind of object when you need it.Actually they just tried if it's possible in space. There is the idea to build a Moon base with 3D printers out of Moon regolith. Sounds like a good idea to me.

The video is not available. Did you publish it after uploading?

I never heard of that. Someone explained to me the fuel will burn no matter of the atmosphere. A SRB should work in space, too.

According to this Pic shows left and right SRBs of a Space Shuttle. they loose thrust. But it's not possible to manually adjust thrust. When a SRB is ignigted it will burn until all fuel is gone. If you somehow limit the exhaust the pressure inside will rise until it explodes. Edit: I quickly made this. Just in case you didn't know how a SRB works.